JUDGMENT :

K.Vinod Chandran, J.

The appellants are two teachers, who claimed seniority over the 1st respondent. The learned counsel for the appellants submits that the judgment impugned in W.A.No.1603 of 2017 specifically looks at the observations in the earlier judgment and also finds that the 2nd respondent has attempted to overrule the judgment passed earlier. We hence consider both the Appeals together since the issue is identical.

2. The 1st respondent herein and the appellants, who were respondents 4 and 5 in the Writ Petitions, were appointed respectively on 04.09.1991, 09.09.1991 and 23.09.1991 on consolidated pay. They continued uninterruptedly till 07.04.1992, on which date they were made Higher Secondary School Teacher (Junior). Again they continued in that post till 15.7.1992, on which date they became Higher Secondary School Teachers (HSST). The bone of contention between them is as to seniority in the cadre of HSST. The Regional Deputy Director (RDD) found that it has to be fixed on the basis of age. The respondents 4 and 5 being older, they were assigned seniority at 1 and 2 positions while the writ petitioner was assigned seniority at position No.3. The RDD relied on R